1. Field of the Invention
The present invention, in general, relates to locks that are used to prevent theft of a motor vehicle and, more particularly, to devices that warn an operator that such a lock is engaged with the vehicle.
There are times when operation of a machine, in particular, a motor vehicle, can occur for a limited period of time or for a limited distance even when a lock that is intended to deter the theft of the vehicle is attached to the vehicle. Operation of the vehicle during those times can damage the vehicle and possibly inflict harm to the operator.
For example, an effective deterrent to motorcycle theft is a lock that is attached to a disk portion of a disk brake. These types of locking devices are referred to as "disk brake" locks. A disk brake lock is typically secured through one of the holes that are normally provided in the disk. If the motorcycle were to be driven with the disk lock in place, the driver would likely be able to proceed a short distance (i.e., an amount that is less than the circumference of the wheel) until the disk brake lock came into contact with the brake caliper or some other part of the motorcycle, such as a fork tube, thereby causing the wheel to abruptly cease its rotation.
The resulting sudden stop would likely cause the motorcycle to fall over. The driver likely would be thrown from the motorcycle and might be injured as a result. The moment of inertia of the wheel combined with the inertia of the motorcycle and driver would likely cause damage to any of a fork, a disk (also referred to as a "rotor"), a wheel, and a brake caliper portion of the motorcycle. Other parts of the motorcycle may also be damaged by the fall. The cost of such a mishap could easily exceed several hundred dollars.
While the intent of such a locking device is to prevent theft of the motorcycle, the locking device can nevertheless result in structural damage to the motorcycle and physical harm to the operator if he simply forgets that the disk brake locking device is installed. This he can easily do by inserting a key into the ignition, starting the motorcycle, and driving off.
Locking devices that are intended to prevent theft of other types of motor vehicles, such as a snowmobile, boat, automobile, or airplane may be subject to similar consequences if the motor vehicle is inadvertently operated while the locking device is still engaged (i.e., attached).
Devices useful to warn an operator that a locking device is attached to the vehicle are known and include flags and other similar devices. The problem is that no matter how visible a warning device may be, eventually the operator will become accustomed to it. Once this occurs he may not notice that it is in place.
Furthermore, there are times when the operator will be under emotional stress, such as when he is in a hurry. During such times, the pressure of the moment may cause him to deviate from his normal routine. Ideally, a lock reminder would preclude operation of the vehicle until the operator has been alerted that the locking device is still engaged with the vehicle, regardless of the "stress" the operator may feel.
Another disadvantage of certain current warning devices is that there is, generally, no mandate that they be used. In other words, the vehicle and the locking device can be used without first having to also install the warning device. This can lead to situations where the warning device is not present to indicate that the locking device is attached to the vehicle. While there may be no way to ensure that a warning device must always be used, there is a need for a lock reminder system that takes the operator through a sequence of steps that, if followed, forces him to use the lock reminder system.
Accordingly, there exists today a need for a lock reminder system that would provide an indication to an operator of a machine that a locking device is attached to the machine and which, if properly used, will provide such an indication before the vehicle can be used.
Clearly, such a system would be useful and desirable.
2. Description of Prior Art
Lock reminders, locks, and locking devices are, in general, known. For example, the following patents describe various types of these devices:
U.S. Pat. No. 1,534,745 to Stapleton, Apr. 21, 1925;
U.S. Pat. No. 1,807,540 to Makranczy, May 26, 1931;
U.S. Pat. No. 2,198,484 to Merkl, Apr. 23, 1940;
U.S. Pat. No. 2,982,041 to Kent, May 2, 1961;
U.S. Pat. No. 2,988,836 to Oberfield, Jun. 20, 1961;
U.S. Pat. No. 4,297,863 to Glock, Nov. 3, 1981;
U.S. Pat. No. 4,631,943 to Hoener, Dec. 30, 1986;
U.S. Pat. No. 5,265,451 to Phifer, Nov. 30, 1993;
U.S. Pat. No. 5,435,160 to Linsalato et al., Jul. 25, 1995;
U.S. Pat. No. 5,492,206 to Shieh, Feb. 20, 1996;
U.S. Pat. No. 5,595,080 to Whinton, Jan. 21, 1997;
U.S. Pat. No. 5,730,008 to Case et al., Mar. 24, 1998;
U.S. Pat. No. 5,746,078 to Kiernan, May 5th, 1998; and
U.S. Pat. No. 5,870,916 to Mahot et al., Feb. 16, 1999.
While the structural arrangements of the above described devices, at first appearance, have similarities with the present invention, they differ in material respects. These differences, which will be described in more detail hereinafter, are essential for the effective use of the invention and which admit of the advantages that are not available with the prior devices.